Well, given it is an A series lens, having AF isn't an issue but you might want to make use of programme mode or shutter priority I'd say go for a Super A (AKA Super Program). You'd do well to pair that with a Motordrive A to help balance it out a bit.

Well, given it is an A series lens, having AF isn't an issue but you might want to make use of programme mode or shutter priority I'd say go for a Super A (AKA Super Program). You'd do well to pair that with a Motordrive A to help balance it out a bit.

That's my tuppence worth.

K.

Yup. For two Canadian cents I agree. However, we are eliminating pennies from our currency, so my opinion may not be worth much.

You could also look at AF bodies bodies to take advantage of aperture automation. The Super Program is a nice solid unit, though.

I would be thinking of the PZ1, which would balance well with the lens and offer DSLR-like Av mode aperture control (a proper front wheel, not the tiny buttons and miniscule LCD offered by the Super-A / Super-Program). There are other PZ series camera that would also do the job (and are cheaper) but are lighter and penta-mirror only.

I would also recommend the Super Program/Super-A if you dont want an AF body. If you want to control aperture off the body, go for a PZ-1. Some MZ- and PZ-series bodies could also work for you, just set the body to manual focus. The lens will be fine on digital bodies and you end up with almost a metre focal length there.

i guess inflation seems to have taken hold every where so i too will add my $0.05

I would take a PZ1, based upon not only all the program features, DSLR like handling etc.... but also because it has a nice bright viewfinder, and you can use the AF confirmation since an F5.6 lens is marginal at best on split image focusing and blacking out I am suprised no one else has picked up on that specific point

Since I already have a pair of K2's and a SuperProgram, they are what I would use, maybe even the ME-F body. That said, there is something to be said about the confirmation feature of the PZ1 or PZ1p. The SuperProgram would work with the A capabilities of the lens but it is a compact body which may be problematic with a big glass.

have I made my preference for this as a film body that obvious through past posts?

Actually the PZ-1p is a little better

But either is a great body, and for the specific use intended, with a relitively slow F5.6 max aperture, I think the viewfinder will be bright enough and the focus confirmation a big advantage over older split image finders. In fact, I picked up a KX with ground glass only focusing screen, shortly after getting my 400/5.6 because my split image went dark.

have I made my preference for this as a film body that obvious through past posts?

Actually the PZ-1p is a little better

But either is a great body, and for the specific use intended, with a relitively slow F5.6 max aperture, I think the viewfinder will be bright enough and the focus confirmation a big advantage over older split image finders. In fact, I picked up a KX with ground glass only focusing screen, shortly after getting my 400/5.6 because my split image went dark.

IIRC, way back in 2008 we debated at length the merits of the KX (vis. my Avatar) versus the PZ-1P for the crown as "Best Pentax Camera Ever." I believe our joint decision, given the utility of the "A" contacts, was to own both.

IIRC, way back in 2008 we debated at length the merits of the KX (vis. my Avatar) versus the PZ-1P for the crown as "Best Pentax Camera Ever." I believe our joint decision, given the utility of the "A" contacts, was to own both.

What I like about the KX, which I still own, along with a third film body, the Ricoh XR-2s (I guess that I qualifies now as pentax TOO!) is that from a control & viewfinder point of view the KX and XR-2s are identical, so when I shot a lot of film switching bodies was wholly transparent.

the reason I kept the KX after getting a PZ-1 was that the KX did not need batteries for anything other than the light meter, and I have a hand held seconic reflected light meter if the batteries ever fail. It was a total loss of power backup.

they are both good, the KX is not so much built like a brick, it simply is a brick. The PZ-1 is a good demonstration of the quality of plastics pentax had on their upper end bodies. Mine shows very little wear at all.

a few thing to consider, although , for the KX, while it is a fine body, the mechanically timed shutter is somewhat limited in speed increments, compared to the 1/3 stops possible on the PZ-1. I will leave out the higher shutter speeds, but that is also a possible benefit of the PZ-1, but higher sync speed may be of some interest, when shooting wildlife with a flash. The KX is a 1/60, the PZ-1 is 1/250 that is 2 full stops more for use in terms of fill flash and exposure control and well worth it. ALso note that the KX is prone to loss of the top of the image in the viewfinder when using long lenses, due to the limitations of physical size of the mirror and the very parallel light path when using some tele's. My vivitar 400/5.6 has a very recessed rear element (it is so deep I can't see it down the lens barrel), and shows the mirror limitation quite well.

Although not an issue with the likely intended use of a 600mm lens the KX has a cloth shutter and cannot be used with Infra red film as it can fog.

If you don't mind not using aperture control of the lens, and not through the body, the MZ-S is the way to go

Are you saying that with the MZ-S you are limited to using the aperture ring on the lens and that the camera body doesn't have an aperture control option?

Great information @monochrome & @Lowell Goudge I really appreciate the input. I'll likely start looking around for the PZ-1 for my next adventure. I was too young to really shoot film. I had some fixed lens 35mm cameras but nothing that really taught me the art like some of you that were slightly older than me.